A sociospatial framework for the anthropology of security

Glück, Zoltán; Low, Setha M.

doi:10.1177/1463499617729229

Cited by 92 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 47 publications

(31 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The highest relevance of the "state" category in research publications can confirm the assumption about "securitization" of the safety discourse. In the anthropological research that set forward the idea of securitization [11], security involves maintaining the regulatory order in society via producing various threats and threat protection [9] (p. 282) by government order and control [10] (p. 487), whereas key security issues include health threats, safety of the urban environment, production of fears, criminalized groups, migrant threats, terrorism and extremism, forces and institutes of security [11,12]. However, in the light of their usage both with "security" and "safety", the categories "health" and "education" also confirm the assumption about securitization.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Security or Safety: Quantitative and Comparative Analysis of Usage in Research Works Published in 2004–2019

Bubnovskaia

Leonidova

Lysova

2019

Behavioral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article is devoted to the statistical analysis of security and safety frequency in the context of categories connected with social institutions and personality features in research works from 2004–2019. Research was based on the following methods: quantitative analysis of safety frequency in the context with coded “categories” related to social institutions and personality features; analysis was conducted with computer-assisted content analysis QDA Miner Lite v. 1.4 and Fisher’s F-test. An analysis of 1157 works showed that the terms “security” and “safety” were quantitatively more frequent when used with concepts related to social institutions than with concepts related to personality features. In our opinion, this qualitative trend shows the prevailing significance of social aspects of security over its personal (psychological) traits for research analysis and practical social aspects. The priority usage of the terms “security” and “safety” can be related to the securitization of society, (i.e., to the increased role and significance of social ways of providing security and protection from threats), primarily with the help of external law-enforcing actors such as the state, police, and army. Securitization counterweights the development of social and psychological mechanisms of security—developing motivation for safe behavior, personal self-regulation, and self-production of security as an internal feeling of protection.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Security or Safety: Quantitative and Comparative Analysis of Usage in Research Works Published in 2004–2019

Bubnovskaia

Leonidova

Lysova

2019

Behavioral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Elsewhere, Samimian-Darash and Stalcup (2016) propose an assemblage approach to security, whereas Maguire and Low (2019), drawing on Gusterson (2004), propagate the idea of the 'securityscape'. The spatial reign also emerges in Low and Maguire's (2019) approach, as well as in Glück and Low's (2017) proposition for a 'sociospatial framework' to understanding security. Within these divergent approaches also lie different definitions of what security is.…”

Section: Anthropology Of Security and Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The anthropology of security is slowly developing into a substantial sub-discipline in anthropology (see Goldstein 2010), marked by the rise of in-depth ethnographic fieldwork on an array of matters concerning security actors and the implications of their work in our world (e.g. Glück and Low 2017;Low and Maguire 2019;Maguire et al 2014Maguire et al , 2018Pedersen and Holbraad 2013). Yet, despite this growing interest in security, there are only a few works that elaborate on how the research is conducted, what ethical issues emerge, and how research on security differs due to the sensitive, political, and controversial nature of security itself (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Why Do We Need Your Research?’

Diphoorn

Grassiani

2020

JEA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The anthropology of security is slowly developing into a substantial sub-discipline of anthropology, yet there are only a few works that elaborate on how the research on security is conducted, what ethical issues emerge in this process, and how this differs from research on other topics due to the sensitive, political, and highly controversial nature of security itself. In this paper, we aim to contribute to this scholarly debate by providing a reflexive account of some of our experiences in researching security across various cases and sites. More specifically, we aim to flesh out the ethical dimensions that, we argue, are inherent to any analysis of security. We do so by focusing on two issues, namely, how we do research (including methods and access to the field site) and how we can or are expected to share our research findings (including public engagement and access to data). By drawing from our own experiences, we aim to show that these are complex matters that underline the sensitive nature of security and call for further empirical and theoretical elaboration.

show abstract

“…Security, broadly defi ned here to encompass a range of constructed threats and associated mitigation strategies, pervades Kenyan government policy and everyday life. Th at this is the case is unsurprising if we consider Zoltán Glück and Setha Low's (2017) recent invitation to study security through the analytic of scale. Security, the authors observe, is both produced by and productive of social and spatial forces operating at multiple, interlocking levels-from the body, to the neighborhood, the city, national and international.…”

Section: Security In Kenya and The Rise Of Gated Livingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Going vertical” in times of insecurity

Goodman¹

2020

Focaal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AbstractThe global proliferation of elite high-rise apartments is often read as evidence of social failure, of increasing socioeconomic disparity and fragmentation. The Jaffery Complex, a vertiginous gated high-rise being constructed in the Kenyan port of Mombasa, seems to embody Corbusian ideologies of social transformation based on an explicit distancing from the streets below, insulating its incoming residents from the frequently fused threats of terror, poverty, and crime. However, ethnographic attention to the multistory mosque located within the complex challenges readings of elite stacked housing solutions as “vertical cocoons,” and reveals the tension between proximity and distance that this urban redevelopment strives to construct.

show abstract

A sociospatial framework for the anthropology of security

Cited by 92 publications

References 47 publications

Security or Safety: Quantitative and Comparative Analysis of Usage in Research Works Published in 2004–2019

Security or Safety: Quantitative and Comparative Analysis of Usage in Research Works Published in 2004–2019

‘Why Do We Need Your Research?’

“Going vertical” in times of insecurity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About